Monday, August 12, 2013

The moment did finally arrive. The much awaited merger between Janata Party & Bhartiya Janata Party formally took place yesterday ( August 11, 2013) .Leaders of BJP met with Janata party President Dr Subramanian Swamy in the evening at 6.15 PM at the residence of BJP President Shri Raj Nath Singh.Those present were Sarva Shri Raj Nath Singh, Nitin Gadkari, Arun Jaitley and Subramanian Swamy. They deliberated for about an hour and around 7.30 PM ,press/ media photographers were called in for short briefing . BJP President said that he was happy to welcome Dr Swamy and his colleagues in BJP. Dr Swamy has been with Jan sangh and by his joining BJP, the party will be strengthened. He offered a bouquet of roses to Dr Swamy.Dr Swamy told the media that " I am happy . It is the need of the hour to consolidate nationalist forces. I will work with my old friends to strengthen BJP".

Thursday, July 4, 2013

I have been getting phone calls from Janata party workers from different places since this afternoon, to ask whether JP has merged with BJP ? The reason for this flood of calls was Dr Swamy's answer to a question from a waiting TV correspondent after Dr Swamy met with Gujarat CM Mr Narendra Modi this morning in New Delhi.Janata Party President said to the TV correspondents that ' I am an old Jansanghi. We are a parivar. Narendra Modi is an old friend for years, We have similar policies. We are willing to work together. If BJP wants, I am ready to merge my party with BJP' May be the last sentence was too HOT a news for some correspondents. They flashed it immediately. India Today released it on its website,followed by India News Channel . Since India News TV channel was flashing it as 'Breaking news', it spread faster. But this should not come as a surprise. Janata Party is already part of the NDA. On most of the political ,social, economic issues the two parties think alike. Most of the Janata Party workers and office bearers have been active in it's earlier avatar Bhartiya Jana Sangh . Dr Swamy entered Rajya Sabha for the first time as a member of Jan Sangh only .For past several years Janata party President Dr Subramanian Swamy has been a very vocal politician highlighting issues which BJP also swears by. Dr Swamy has emerged as a champion of the Hindutva cause through his speeches and active work on the ground.Entire Hindu Community ( barring a few SICKularists) consider Dr Swamy as a leader who deserves the credit for restoration of staus-quo on Ram Sethu . But for his active role in courts ,the mark of Hindu heritage would have been destroyed by UPA government.We all know that it was Dr Swamy who persuaded Chinese authorities to open the doors of Holy shrine Kailash Man-Sarovar in 1980 . Dr Swamy himself went to Kailash Man Sarovar in the first group in 1980. Be it the issue of religious conversion, the Ram-Lala temple in Ayodhya, the issue of management of Hindu temples and holy shrines, Tirupathi Devasthanam issue, the harassment and political vendetta against Shankaracharya of Kanchi Kamakoti peetham, the evils of caste system, fight against religious reservations to minorities, brutal violence against Baba Ramdev & his followers, Dr Subramanian Swamy has proved his might & resolve to fight.BJP only stands to gain by the merger of Janata Party as a new force will ,then ,be available to BJP.Dr Swamy has always stood for consolidation of nationalist forces and has been fighting against anti national corrupt forces which now UPA leads. In this true spirit of consolidation of nationalist forces, Dr Swamy has made this offer to merge his party . If BJP agrees ,it will only boost the morale of the common worker of BJP also, who now counts Dr Swamy as a great patriot,statesman and a tall leader. Janata party has all along supported the move to work closely with BJP and other like minded groups . In the national executive meeting of Janata party on 17th March in New Delhi ( later on endorsed fully by the national council meeting of Janata Party , which was attended by representative of 17 state units), the resolution was adopted to work with BJP and if necessary merge with BJP to consolidate nationalist forces. Now since Dr Swamy has made it public through the media , it is for the BJP to respond. The nation is waiting . This unification of 'Janata-Sangh Parivar' is in the national interest. - Arvind Chaturvedi National General Secretary,Janata Party

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

Many different departments of the Government of India have been spending public money on Iftar parties . Despite a clear directive from the ministry of finance not to spend public money on such religious parties , various departments continue to do that. According to a news item published in August 6, 2012 issue of Indian Express Online ( Full news item reproduced here from Internet), the PMO, External Affairs Ministry ,LOk Sabha & Rajya Sabha Secretariat and the CPWD have spent Rs. 1.75 Crores over the past 10 years. Janata Party President Dr Subramanian Swamy has asked the External Affairs minister Salman Khurshid to ask whether the minister would consider similar funds for parties related to Hindu festivals also . The text of the letter written by Dr Swamy and the original news item ,are reproduced here.

July 2, 2013.

Mr. Salman Khurshid,

Minister of External Affairs,

South Block,

New Delhi.

Dear Salman,

With this letter I enclose a news item
posted online in Indian Express of August 6, 2012 regarding the expenses out of
public funds by the Ministry of External Affairs and other Departments for meeting the expenses on Iftar
parties. I write to
ask whether you would consider also providing funds for the celebration of Holi
and Deepavali or will such expenses be confined only for Iftar parties. If so, why so?

The Prime Minister's
Office, External Affairs Ministry, Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha Secretariats and
Central Public Works Department (CPW-D) have spent Rs 1.75 crore on 18 iftar
parties over the past 10 years even though the Ministry of Finance (MoF)
maintains that public funds can't be used for such events.

In fact, responses of different departments to an RTI application filed by
The Indian Express, seeking details of expenses on iftar parties — not a few of
which were hosted in the past decade — reveal a lack of clarity about rules
regarding such expenditure. While the MoF's Department of Expenditure said
expenses on iftar parties are not allowed from the state exchequer — it also
said the host departments didn't seek its permission for such parties — other
departments maintained otherwise.

The Rajya Sabha Secretariat, which has spent Rs 22.75 lakh on five iftar
parties since 2007-08, said: "Yes, the secretariat bears expenses incurred
in this regard." When asked under which rule, it replied: "There is
no rule. It is as per the convention." It, however, added that
"expenditure is met on shared basis in the ratio of 2:1 between the Rajya
Sabha Secretariat and the Ministry of External Affairs."

The Lok Sabha Secretariat said spending public money on iftar parties was
allowed and that it has spent Rs 5.83 lakh on two such parties in 2010 and
2011. "Expenditure on iftar parties is met from the hospitality grant of
the Lok Sabha Secretariat," it added.

The PMO's response to the RTI request, on the other hand, was interesting:
its reply to almost all queries about iftar parties was that "information
sought is not a part of records held by this office". The PMO has hosted
six iftar parties since 2004 at a cost of Rs 1.03 crore, which, it said, was
borne by the External Affairs Ministry (MEA) and the CPWD.

The MEA, on its part, said it has spent about Rs 41.48 lakh on 10 iftar
parties, including the ones hosted by the PMO, since 2004. But to all other
queries on the matter, it replied: "No specific information
available".

- See more at:
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/mof-says-can-t-spend-public-money-on-iftar-but-govt-spent-rs-1.75-cr-in-10-yrs/984300/0#sthash.sly2MBN1.dpuf

Janata Party President Dr Subramanian swamy has questioned bi-lateral deal on airline seats and the agreement between Jet Airways and Etihad airline.

Dr Swamy has written two letters to PM on the issue and has brought out the fear that it is likely to be a security risk to India. On Tuesday Dr Swamy was interviewed by CNBC-TV18 on this issue, which was carried out on the website moneycontrol.com. The same is being reproduced here .

Cancel Jet deal; will
move court to stop Air Asia: Swamy

Speaking to CNBC-TV18,
Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy said he is vehemently opposed the idea
of Air Asia operating out of India, saying he will move court to stop it from
taking off.

Even
though the PMO has asserted that government is not divided over the air
services agreement between India and Abu Dhabi, cracks are apparent. That the
trouble for the Rs 2058-crore deal was far from over became clear when the PMO
advised the ministry of civil aviation to consider a calibrated approach
towards aviation deals.

Q:Before
I actually get to the objections that you have raised as far as the Jet-Etihad
deal is concerned, let me ask you about why you are opposing the AirAsia deal?
You have said this morning that you want the AirAsia deal scrapped. What is
your objection to the AirAsia deal?

A:The policy was very clear that
there are two aspects of it. One is that foreign investment is only permitted
for an existing airline. There is no existing airline here in India. Tata is
not an existing airline, therefore I have a good opinion about AirAsia.

Q:If you
have a good opinion about them, if the Indian consumer stands to benefit, then
why would you oppose this particular transaction. Why are you opposing this
particular deal and even as far as the foreign direct investment (FDI)
regulation is concerned, that matter was clarified by the Department of
Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP)?

A:They have not clarified it.
The civil aviation ministry has stated in the Foreign Investment Promotion
Board (FIPB) that this is against the regulations that it has to be an existing
airline. Ajit Singh said to one of the leading newspaper that under no
circumstances it can be given to any airline which is not existing.

Q:If we
are living by regulations, the FIPB has taken a decision to allow AirAsia to
operate in this country. The FIPB, which has had consultations with each and
every ministry that you just talked about, has said that AirAsia is okay with
flying in this country?

A:The FIPB is one of the most
scandalous bodies of India under Chidambaram’s leadership. It did so in the
Aircel-Maxis also and it has done it in this and when I challenge it in court,
I will bring it out. How did they disregard this fundamental regulation?

Q:Is
your objection against the FIPB or is your objection against Chidambaram?

A:Both combined. There is no
difference between the two.

Q:So are
you saying that even as far as the AirAsia matter is concerned that you are
going to move court?

A:Of course, I may move earlier
than this one because I think Jet and Etihad is going to take a long time to
finalise.

Q:So you
are saying that you will actually move on AirAsia before you will move the
Supreme Court against Jet-Etihad?

A:Yes, because Jet-Etihad is
going to take a long time to consider. It’s not going to be cleared soon.

Q:If you
are now saying that Jet-Etihad will take a long time to clear. Through the day
and in your letter to the Prime Minister, you have been talking about the sense
of urgency, the haste that the government has shown in trying to clear this
deal. You yourself are now saying that the Jet-Etihad deal is far from being
cleared?

A:Thanks to my letter it is
going to be delayed. Otherwise it would have been cleared by now.

Q:So,
you are taking credit for the fact that the government hasn’t acted on giving it
clearance?

A:I am not taking credit. I
wrote a letter and the action followed immediately after my letter. Actions
speak louder than anything, I might say.

Q:Lets
look at the facts and lets leave conjecture aside. The Indian government has
not signed the bi-lateral agreement with the Abu Dhabi government so far. As
far as the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) clearance is concerned,
the Jet-Etihad deal has not been cleared by the FIPB the matter was deferred
again. As far as Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi's) clearance is
concerned, the matter has not been cleared by Sebi. As far as the competition
commission of India (CCI) is concerned, the matter has not been cleared by the
CCI as yet. So, perhaps are you being a bit premature in pronouncing the fact
that this deal ought to be scrapped?

A:Had I not written the letter
on May 28, the FIPB would have cleared it on June 11. That was the
understanding that I have on the basis of what people told me.

May of
them are members of the FIPB meeting. It’s because of my letter that this
happened. So, its not premature, it was very well timed. It was at the right
time.

When I
saw that they were even disregarding the parliamentary committee, standing
committee report I thought the time had come for me to write a letter. I wrote
a letter to the Prime Minister to say that if the deal gets cleared, he would
be culpable under Section 13 of the prevention of corruption Act.

Q:What
is your biggest objection? Is your objection the bilateral agreement or is it
the ownership issue?

A:If my biggest objection has to
be summarised, it is that the Indian airlines industry is sought to be wrecked
by four ministers who have some other motives other than national interest.

Q:You
are saying that you will move the Supreme Court against AirAsia’s deal, but you
will not move the Supreme Court against Jet-Etihad atleast not as of now?

A:Yes, till they take a decision
I can't move. I will go to the Supreme Court as far as AirAsia is concerned.

Q:They
have crossed the FIPB, but they are yet to get a licence to fly?

A:FIPB is an illegal decision.
So, I have a cause of action. There is no decision where I can take cause of
actions in the court. You must know the requirements of the court before I can
go to court.

Tuesday, July 2, 2013

Dr Subramanian Swamy was in China recently to attend the World Peace Forum Meeting , at Beijing. World leaders and security & peace experts from different countries attended the meeting. Dr Swamy was the only one from India to discuss the security threats and the solutions.

Dr Swamy was interviwed by several journalists reporting at the WPF. He was specially invited to be interviewed by the Programme (Audio ) People in The Know.

The interview was recorded in MP3 format and the same is presented here along with the introduction of the programme as obtained courtesy CriEnglish .com

http://mod.cri.cn/eng/features/pik/2013/07/0703pik.mp3

The world is facing a raft of security challenges, both traditional and new in kind. Asia, a high-flying continent with great political, historical, social and ethical diversity, is not immune from these challenges. The ongoing conflict in Syria, the resurgence of Islamic radical groups and rising tensions in territorial disputes among Asian nations has become a major source of instability and threat. Starting from Wednesday, the People in the know program will assess the security situation in Asia and China's role in bringing peace to the region. In the first edition of our series on Asian security, we take a look at south Asia with a special focus on India and Pakistan.So how can China and India forge deeper mutual trust and solve their border dispute in a timely and peaceful manner? What efforts can China and Pakistan jointly make to tackle security challenges, especially those posed by extremism in the region?Ni Hao, you're listening to People In the Know, bringing you insights into headline news in China and around the World, I'm Zheng Chenguang in Beijing.We speak to Dr. Subramanian Swamy, former Cabinet Minister of Commerce, Law and Justice, Government of India, now President of India's Janata Party. We caught up with him at the World Peace Forum, recently held in Beijing and Riaz Hussain Khokahar, Pakistan's former Foreign Secretary.

Monday, July 1, 2013

Rise in Muslim population due to migration from Bangladesh, says Subramanian Swamy

‘B’desh migrants adding to Muslim population’

Mumbai: Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy said the increase in population among Muslims in India is due to the burgeoning illegal migration from neighbouring nation Bangladesh.

"Growing population among Muslims is due to the migration from Bangladesh. The neighbouring country needs to be firmly told to take back their people," Swamy said at a book release function ‘Muslim Jansankhya: Ek Chinta' published in Marathi and Hindi.

On Article 370 of the constitution for Jammu and Kashmir, Swamy said it can be repealed through a presidential notification. “There is no need for a parliamentary vote,” he added.

- See more at: http://post.jagran.com/rise-in-muslim-population-due-1372644616#sthash.NzOwpKDu.dpuf

Dr.
Swamy Rubbishes claims that Telangana would not be economically viable

New Delhi : Janata Party
President Subramanian Swamy on Monday said that any Telangana package should be
rejected outright, as nothing short of separate Telangana would do. There
should be no compromise on this basic demand, he said.

A publication ‘A Rebuttal to
Visalandhra Goebbels Propaganda’ brought out by Telangana Development Forum,
US, to reject the claims of Vishalandhra Mahasabha against the demand for
separate Telangana State. The publication was released by Dr Subramanian
Swamy. The author Konatham Dilip ,Delhi TJAC Convener D Ramakrishna Reddy &
Sriram Vedire were present on the occasion.

Dr Subramanian Swamy praised
the effort of the Telangana Development Forum to counter the claims of
Vishalandhra Mahasabha. “In a democracy, it is important to challenge false
propaganda. Even during the Emergency, the false propaganda was challenged
through underground literature,” he said.

The NDA, he said, is all for
Telangana and if the NDA comes to power, he will do everything in his power to
ensure the creation of Telangana. Dr Swamy said, “You are closest to achieving
Telangana. In 2014, we should have the celebrations meeting in Hyderabad, after
the creation of Telangana.”

“Telangana activists should
never despair. One does not know when Telangana may happen,” he said. Citing
from history, he said when the Quit India Movement collapsed in 1944, people
gave up hope of achieving Independence. But it happened in 1947. Again, during
the Emergency, when he managed to escape, there was not even a whimper of
protest. “People used to ask me, how will things go on like this? I had no
answer. Indira Gandhi made a foolish decision and called elections and she lost
all over the country and she was defeated in her own constituency. When it all
seems impossible, things suddenly happen,” Dr Swamy said.

Two
States would be a credit to Telugus
Citing solid reasons for creation of Telangana, he said: “Andhra Pradesh is too
large a State; there is no dispute over language and it would be a credit if
there are two Telugu-speaking States. There has been a consistent demand for
separate State.” He rubbished the claim that Telangana is not viable
economically. If it is true then trade between States is always an option open
to it

(Based on report
by Venkat Parsa in The Hans India
)

In the Photo : Janata Party president Dr Subramanian Swamy (fourth from left) and Justice
Rajinder Sachar (third from left) releasing the CD format of publication ‘A
Rebuttal to Visalandhra Goebbels Propaganda’ in New Delhi on Monday.
Academician Gautam Pingle (second from right) and others also seen

Janata Party President Dr Subramanian Swamy has raised the Aircel-Maxis deal once again and asked Mr Man Mohan Singh to call for immediate review of the deal .

This morning ,in a letter to PM Dr Swamy reminded PM of his earlier letter on the topic ( please see this blog for full text of earlier letter) and questioned the role of Finance Minister Mr P.Chidambaram .

Full text of the letter is here :

July 1, 2013.

Dr. Manmohan Singh,

Prime Minister of India,

South Block,

New Delhi.

Dear Prime Minister:

Please refer to my earlier letter to
you dated April 18, 2013 regarding the Aircel-Maxis deal and the CBI’s Supreme
Court-monitered-investigation into the same. In my Interlocutory Application No. 36
in the matter, the Supreme Court had directed the CBI to investigate the issues
I had raised therein, which included the fraudulent and bogus clearance of the
deal by the FIPB allegedly claimed as on March 7, 2006 {when Mr. P. Chidambaram
was Finance Minister}. Hence
his role in the matter would automatically come under the scanner of the CBI.

In this letter I bring to your notice
information I have recently received. A
Secret Note No. 51/1/2007-JIC(CS) had been prepared by the Joint Intelligence
Committee of your Government based on inputs from all the main central
Intelligence agencies submitted. In the said Secret Note it is stated Saudi Arabia’s Saudi
Telecom had as far back as 2007 acquired 25% of the Maxis equity by paying $3
billion then. Recent
information I have received from Malaysia reveal that Saudi Telecom will
purchase additional equity to raise its share to 35%. There is also news that France was
expecting its telecom company to purchase an additional 20%. In other words, Maxis would cease to
be a Malaysian company.

Given Saudi Arabia’s Wahabi propensity
to finance Islamic fundamentalist forces in India and Bangla Desh, JIC had
rightly wondered as far back as 2007 whether it is in India’s national security
interests that India should provide access to such a vital area as telecom
sector, especially when Saudi Telecom will through Maxis has licences for
sensitive circles such in Northeast
India, hit by Islamic infiltration from Bangla Desh.

What is all the more shocking is that
Mr. Chidambaram had failed to call for security clearance for the Aircel Maxis
or inform the FIPB of the Saudi Telecom angle but instead fraudulently gave a
bogus contrived FIPB clearance to the deal.

As Prime Minister therefore, you must
call for a review of the Aircel Maxis deal immediately and instruct the
CBI to investigate the matter. Otherwise,
I shall have to approach the Supreme Court by way of another Interlocutory
Application.

Saturday, June 29, 2013

Janata
Party President Subramanian Swamy has asked China to accept the McMahon Line as
the border with India just as it did in the case of Myanmar to resolve the
vexed dispute. China should accept McMahon Line since it had accepted the same
line drawn at the same time in 1912 with Myanmar, Swamy said while speaking on
"China's relations with its neighbours" at the 2013 World Peace Forum
organised by China's Tsinghua University in association with Chinese Foreign
Ministry. "Such an acceptance will vastly improve India-China
relations," Swamy argued in a lengthy paper presented at the meeting
attended by strategic think-tanks from China and a number of other countries.

"On the contrary for more than two-and-a-half
thousand years, India and China, two large neighbours and economic superpowers
by the then prevailing standards, have had good and peaceful relations based on
mutual respect and cultural exchanges, and in fact never had a single military
clash till 1962," he said. "Chinese grievance is that the border
delineated by British imperialists and colonialists and called the Sir Henry
McMahon Line was unfair to China, taking advantage of China's then weak
position," he said.

"Of course this is a contestable view,"
Swamy said. "The key question is what prompts today's China in regard to
Japan and India, to make a grievance of a long past historical injustice and unequal
treaties enforced by imperialists on a weak China, versus what makes China of
today to ignore such injustices in case of others such as in the now settled
China-Myanmar border dispute accepting the same McMahon Line" he said.

Janata Party President Subramanian Swamy on a visit to Beijing has made a
pitch for India and China to work more closely on counterterrorism, even as he
voiced his support for the Chinese government’s efforts in tackling terrorism
in Xinjiang amid renewed criticism aimed at its policies after fresh violence
this week.

Dr. Swamy, who was here at the invitation of the World Peace Forum, a
diplomacy conference co-hosted by Beijing’s Tsinghua University and the Chinese
Foreign Ministry, said India and China should come together, especially in
Afghanistan, considering their common concerns on terror. His comments came
during a week in which the issue has been in the spotlight in China following
violence in Xinjiang that left at least 35 people killed. While official media
described the incident in Turpan as an act of terrorism, many minority Uighur
rights groups have blamed ethnic unrest for the violence. U.S. State Department
spokesperson Patrick Ventrell said last week the U.S. was “deeply concerned by
the ongoing reports of discrimination” in Xinjiang. Dr. Swamy on Saturday hit
out at the U.S., saying its comments were “damaging to the fight against
terrorism”, adding that China needed “to review its relations with Pakistan
since some of these Xinjiang terrorists are also of Pakistani origin.”

At the Tsinghua forum, he also made a pitch for India and China to move
beyond the boundary dispute. “India and China should be strategic partners, not
adversaries. The gain in Asian stability and international security would be
enormous,” he said. He also called on China to accept the McMahon Line - the
effective boundary in the eastern section of the border with India, which China
disputes – to end the row, as it had done with Myanmar. “Such an acceptance
will vastly improve India China relations,” he said.

Thursday, June 20, 2013

Janata Party chief Dr Subramanian Swamy has questioned yet another airline deal . After raising doubts about Jet-Etihad deal ( refer to earlier pages in this blog (http://janatapartyblog.blogspot.in/2013/06/swamy-writes-to-pm-demands.html) , this time the questions relate to Air Asia -Tata deal. Dr Swamy earlier wrote to Prime Minister Man Mohan singh on Etihad deal and now he has written another letter to PM on Air Asia. We are reproducing the text of the letter from Dr Swamy to PM.

Dr. Man Mohan Singh June 19, 2013

Prime Minister

New Delhi

Dear Prime Minister:

1.I write this letter on the subject of another developing mega fraud in the nation’s Civil Aviation affairs, which fraud also impacts on India’s national security.

2.The fraud is in the FIPB clearance given under the authority of the Minister of Finance Mr. P. Chidambaram and is prosecutable under provisions of law relating to cheating, criminal conspiracy, corruption and which fraud will cause collapse of many of our domestic airlines, creating a systemic risk for financial institutions, a large loss to public exchequer, and blow a hole in the country's transportation infrastructure.

3.Air Asia Joint Venture was cleared by the FIPB and approved by Finance Ministry in violation of all norms, rules, regulations, policy governing the Civil Aviation Sector, Foreign Investment and Security imperatives.

Brief Summation of Events:

1.Planning Commission through its Order NO.18/1/2011 Tpt. dated 6.4.2011 had recommended constitution of a Working Group on Civil Aviation for the formulation of 12th Five Year Plan review the physical and financial performance of various constituents units of Aviation sector with special focus on Ministry of Civil Aviation and its constituents indicating their achievements and failures.

2.In terms of the aforesaid Order, The Report of Working Group on Civil Aviation for formulation of twelfth five year plan (2012-2017), recognized that most Indian carriers are reeling under losses.

3.During the three year period between April 1, 2007 and March 31, 2010, Indian carriers had incurred an accumulated operational loss in excess of Rs. 26,000 crores.

4.The said Report further acknowledges the impediments in the efficient working of the aviation sector including the the FDI policy governing the aviation sector. It notes that:

"..the existing FDI Policy governing the CIvil AviatIon Sector does not permIt foreign airlines investment[emphasis added] thereby denying access to potential sources of capital and expertise. This requires a re-look to pave the way Indian carriers to access the much needed capital at low cost and also the expertise to access international markets quickly."

a.That on 07.02.2012 the 8th meeting of Group of Ministers on Civil Aviation was chaired by the Finance Minister, wherein the issue of permitting FDI up to 49% by the foreign airlines, in Indian carriers was taken up and it was decided during the same, that an appropriate proposal be tendered for the consideration of the CCEA.

b.The Appropriate CCEA Note was prepared by MoCA (Ministry of Civil Aviation)and sent to various Ministries (of Corporate Affairs, Home Affairs and External Affairs), Departments (Commerce and Economic Affairs), Planning Commission and DIPP for their consideration and comments. The said Note inter-alia:

i. introduces the CCEA Note as a proposal "to invest in the capital of Indian companies operating scheduled and non­ scheduled air transport services";

ii. rationalises the proposal on:

(a) the 8th meeting of Group of Ministers on Civil Aviation, chaired by the Finance Minister, on 07.02.2012 on the issue of permitting FDI up to 49% by foreign airlines, in Indian carriers and hence the proposal;

(b) private airlines are in dire need of funds for the operations and service up-gradation to compete with other global carriers;

(c) denial of access to foreign capital could result in the collapse of many of our domestic airlines, creating a systemic risk for financial institution, and a vital gap in the country's infrastructure

(d) the budget speech 2012-2013 of the then Finance Minister which envisages such equity participation by foreign airlines in the airlines already operating in India;

c.That he comments/suggestions from the authorities above supported the CCEA Note to permit foreign airlines, to Invest in the capital of Indian companies operating scheduled and non-scheduled air transport services upto the limit of 49% of their paid up share capital. However, no suggestion was proposed, to include a “greenfield airline” project.

"foreign airlines also to invest, in the capital of Indin companies, operating scheduled and non-scheduled air transport services, up to the limit of 49% of their paid up capital.”

e.That it was clear and express policy to allow FDI ONLY in existing carriers was reiterated by Civil Aviation Minister, Ajlt Singh's observation as published in Business Standard, inter alia stating:

"We are not qiving licences for greenfield airlines. As of now, FDI (foreign direct investment) In aviation can come only through existing airlines."

Thus it is clear as per existing policy FDI IS ALLOWED ONLY IN EXISTING AIRLINES AND NOT IN NEW JOINT VENTURES.

FURTHER DETAILS OF SCAM

f.That on 19.02.2013 A Memorandum of Agreement was signed between Air Asia Berhad, Air Asia Investment, Tata Sons limited and Telestra Private Tradeplace Limited for forming the Joint Venture Air Asia. Similarly Articles of Association of AirAsia are also executed by the Parties and Application for FIPB approval was filed by Air Asia.

g.That on 01.03.2013 Directorate General of Civil Aviation an instrument of MoCA, issued the "Guidelines For Foreign Direct Investment in the Civil Aviation Sector". The said Guidelines in its object and reasons inter-alia state:

"The Existing policy however prohibits FDI by foreign airlines directly or indirectly in the equity of scheduled and non scheduled passenger airlines. The Government of India has reviewed the position in this regard and decided to permit foreign airlines also to invest in the capital of Indian companies, operating scheduled and non-scheduled air transport services, up to the limit of 49% of their pad up capitol vide the Press Note issued by the Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, New Delhi...... "

5.It is abundantly clear that the Guidelines were issued only for the existing airlines since the CCEA Note, Ministry of Civil Aviation decision, and the DIPP PressNote NO.6 of 2012 were all based on the reason and for purpose of allowing FDI in the existing airlines.

6.That on 04.04.2013, the meeting of FIPS was scheduled to decide on the Application filed on behalf of Air Asia. The FIPB issued the impugned approval granting clearance, despite:

a) the Ministry of Civil Aviation's ("MoCA") explicit and clear suggestion that the impugned approval is against the letter and spirit of the Cabinet Note which delineated that the amendment was aimed at infusing capital into the existing cash- starved aviation companies;

b) MoCA's objection during the impugned approval stage inter-aliastating that the DIPP's Press Note 6 of 2012 needs clarification to the effect that the same applies to JV's to be incorporated also; .

7. The basis of Cabinet discussion for allowing FDI was reflected in the underlying reasons for need of such policy change in the DIPP Press Note clearly, which read that FDI in foreign airline was permitted by the Government only in the carriers operating an airline as opposed to one desiring to set up a new airline.

8. It is reliably learnt by me that in the entire process of CCEA Note and decision, no consultation took place with the Ministry of Defence. It is disturbing to note the same as many airports in India, including Pune, Goa, Chandigarh, Amritsar, Agra and Bagdogra to name a few are Defence Airports, which are being used as Civil Aviation airports. It is also noteworthy to point out that, an application in the late nineties on behalf of Singapore airlines to set up a domestic airlines (with an indian partner) was rejected due to severe concerns raised by the Ministry of Defence.

9. That Further Press Note No 6 (2012 series) dated September 20, 2012 inter alia mandates that scheduled operator's permit can be granted only to a company" the substantial ownership and effective control of which is vested in Indian Nationals" . Similarly, Section 1(ii) (c) of Schedule XI of Aircraft Rules, 1934 mandates, that (a) "substantial ownership" and (b) "effective control" of such entity (to whom the scheduled operator's permit be granted) be vested in Indian nationals. However, neither (a) "substantial ownership" nor (b) "effective control" are defined and explained either under the governing act i.e. the Aircraft Act 1934 and the Rules there under, the Press Note No.6 of 2012, or any other legislation/policy governing the aviation sector leading to a legislative vacuum.

10. There is a potent threat of foreign airlines structuring their business with the intent of exercising "effective control" of the airline due to their nature of investments being strategic rather than financial. This will expose domestic skies into the hands of foreign airline which is clearly neither the purpose nor the intent for opening the FDI to foreign airlines. Such potential threat will be even more pronounced in cases where a foreign airline partners with non-aviation business entities in India. In mature aviation sector such as United States and European Union, the statute and/or policies of the government explicitly define the terms (a) "substantial ownership" and (b) "effective control". Further, such definitions and their application/operation are specific to the aviation industry and is distinct from the general statute/policy relating to ownership and control in other businesses in order to protect the domestic skies from a foreign airline's (through its subsidiary or directly) possible sabotage and control, something that Is duly recognized under the principal instrument of international public air law - The Chicago Convention, 1944.

11.That further it is noteworthy to point out that media reports confirm that JV partners of AirAsia (India) Pvt. l.e. Tata Sons Ltd and Telstra Tradeplace Pvt. Ltd. Are only strategic investors and are neither a part of existing operating scheduled airlines in India nor Involved in any manner in the civil aviation sector. Therefore it becomes imperative that While evaluating, the Government must apply the doctrine of 'piercing the corporate veil', as has been used in foreign jurisdictions to identify and establish whether such "substantial ownership" and "effective control" is followed in letter and spirit. Such requirement and scrutiny by MOCA/DGCAmust not be perfunctory but be objective. It is essential that such compliance is not only on paper but infact in the hands of Indian nationals.

12. That Media reports confirm that application of Air Asia (a new airline venture in India) has been approved by the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB). And that Finance Ministry has given approval, Such decision under an existing legislative vacuum, is not only contrary to existing declared policy, but also in direct contravention to the rationale and decision relating to FDI permission to foreign airline in civil aviation sector by CCEA taken in September 2012 as well as contrary to the recommendations made by Committees constituted to identify specific issues plaguing the civil aviation sector in India.

13. Hence the FIPB decision clearing Air Asia is not legally valid with either the requirement/need of the aviation sector, the recommendations made by various empowered committees, and in fact, directly contravenes the existing policy as per decision of the CCEA, and is a gross and blatant fraud which involves provisions in law of cheating, criminal conspiracy, violation of various provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act and not in the public interest since it is clearly an attempt to cause a collapse of many of our domestic airlines, creating a systemic risk for financial institutions, loss to public exchequer and a vital gap in the country's Infrastructure, Therefore I strongly recommend that you hold a comprehensive review and following which I am certain that you would revoke this impugned fraudulent Air Asia deal.

14. If you decide to direct a review of this aforesaid permission to allow this Air Asia deal, and its revocation, I shall happy to assist your government in the entire matter as the matter is of national importance and public interest involving not only economic considerations but also vital aspects of national security. Otherwise, if your Government decides for extraneous reasons to disregard the public interest, and continue with this deal, I shall have to approach the courts by way of a Public Interest Litigation.